As I think about it more, perhaps it is just as well that your Flux CoG Module cannot be connected to the headlight.

The CoG Module might produce excessive Modulation of luminous flux in the headlight bulb, causing rapid-cycle lightening of the headlight and thus an annoying pogo-ing effect on the front suspension.

Still, after my big win at Ozlotto yesterday, I would like to order TWO reverse cycle polarisers, REGARDLESS OF COST.
Two to start with, anyway.
(a) I have never had a motorcycle with reverse, before, and
(b) When sailing my new yacht [just ordered] in the tropical Whitsundays, I can see a reverse cycle polariser being very useful for counteracting any cyclones that crop up [or DOWN, as the case may be].

Is the Polariser completely waterproof, or will I have to cover it with a Horse-size Trojan ?

Congratulations on your big win.

I got Division Two, so will settle for a small bottle of octane booster in a tankful of 98.

As I think about it more, perhaps it is just as well that your Flux CoG Module cannot be connected to the headlight.

Is the Polariser completely waterproof, or will I have to cover it with a Horse-size Trojan ?

He isth not a "horsthe thized twojan"... he isth in fact of normal thstature... a General Cthenturwion in the Woman Wegion... Bigguth Dickuth... he wanks amongst the highest in Wome... do you find that amusthig...?

"Hey Nero... does this mean we have to suit up in that sweaty latex armour again... my brass cod piece is still mottled from the battle with Sparta...?!"

Troy, thanks for the courteous and considered response to what was a rather average post by me - I would have been harder on it myself if someone else had posted it.!

I did not intend to dispute the benefit of the various standing / leaning / hanging off / weighting / counter steering / whatever/ whatever, techniques but if most of them are or should be intuitive/ instinctive if you are to have any hope of riding a bike with any degree of proficiency.

If you genuinely believe they work, you will go faster using using them, and it doesn't really mater why you are faster/ better, as long as what you are trying to achieve happens.

Most of the advocates vastly overstate the effect off them - for example the forces generated by the rotation of the wheels as they roll along the road have been measured to contribute less than 2 % to the stability of a bike, but the advocates of counter steering would have you believe they are the only source.

Some are simply race techniques which most riders have neither the need for or the equipment to carry out - four seconds gained by hanging off the bike till the knee touches the ground might mean a lot to a racer at the end of a race , but it isn't of much importance to me at the end of a leisurely six hour run.

It is well to remember full sized riders like Jeff Duke knew nothing of counter steering, kept his knees firmly clamped to the tank, his bum planted on the seat, and his feet on the rests, yet was able to make more than respectable progress on bikes with vastly inferior tires and suspension to the bikes which the almost universally pint sized racers jump around on today.

That was probably because he genuinely believed that his way of riding was the fasted way round the circuit, and that is just about were I came in------.

Beemer, I suspect you've touched on something which really interests Troy ( and others of our generation). Either here or somewhere else we honestly would be interested in an educated discussion about what t was like riding the pre suspension bikes. We hit the dirt in the early 80's , right when bikes developed suspension and the mx greats were starting to stand because that's what worked on modern bikes. I can still remember feeling my 82 ktm 125 work when I was up on the pegs, what a revelation because it honestly hadn't made much difference to the at1 I'd been riding before!

I'm the "goober" from Stromtrooper who called out the OP on his statement "the CG goes down when you stand up"

Just to put it into perspective, I tried to explain that the bike has a CG and the rider has a CG.

The part the OP forgot to bring across here was that I said this was true OFF the bike.

As soon as the rider gets on, the two CG's become one and the resulting CG is called the COMBINED CG. (You could even consider a full tank or top box in this calculation)

If the rider stands up of course his CG goes up too, and SO DOES THE COMBINED CG location (but not by much as stated here) The idea that the riders CG suddenly shoots 3 feet down to the pegs is laughable.

I never disputed that it helps during off road riding, or that it keeps your gentleman's region from being driven into to the tank with every bump.

As a bit of background, one of my clients moves odd shaped, extremely heavy loads by rail. If the item's CG is too far to one side, I have to calculate how many concrete blocks or steel plate are needed to bring the combined CG of the rail-car load and ballast back to within 2" of the car's center-line. I also plan the lifting of really heavy and unusual crane loads and calculating the combined CG so the load can be lifted level is pretty much a daily occurrence for me.

Now SouthernCross, instead of "running to mommy" on another forum, why don't you PM me and I'll do my best to explain why you are mistaken. I'm a friendly sort of chap and I'll be happy to educate you and I'll even try not to be condescending.

I'm the "goober" from Stromtrooper who called out the OP on his statement "the CG goes down when you stand up"

Just to put it into perspective, I tried to explain that the bike has a CG and the rider has a CG.

The part the OP forgot to bring across here was that I said this was true OFF the bike.

As soon as the rider gets on, the two CG's become one and the resulting CG is called the COMBINED CG. (You could even consider a full tank or top box in this calculation)

If the rider stands up of course his CG goes up too, and SO DOES THE COMBINED CG location (but not by much as stated here) The idea that the riders CG suddenly shoots 3 feet down to the pegs is laughable.

I never disputed that it helps during off road riding, or that it keeps your gentleman's region from being driven into to the tank with every bump.

As a bit of background, one of my clients moves odd shaped, extremely heavy loads by rail. If the item's CG is too far to one side, I have to calculate how many concrete blocks or steel plate are needed to bring the combined CG of the rail-car load and ballast back to within 2" of the car's center-line. I also plan the lifting of really heavy and unusual crane loads and calculating the combined CG so the load can be lifted level is pretty much a daily occurrence for me.

Now OP, instead of "running to mommy" on another forum, why don't you PM me and I'll do my best to explain why you are mistaken. I'm a friendly sort of chap and I'll be happy to educate you and I'll even try not to be condescending.

EDIT: I just caught your post above where you apologized to the group and admit we were talking about two different things because of your misuse of the term "Center of Gravity" Will you go back to Stromtrooper and post that there too?

......
EDIT: I just caught your post above where you apologized to the group and admit we were talking about two different things because of your misuse of the term "Center of Gravity" Will you go back to Stromtrooper and post that there too?.......

Just this bit. I think you'll find that was not the OP, but someone else.

Craneguy, the term "goob" or "goober" was actually used by Oldfatbeerman ~ but he doesn't deserve any blame over that.
Oldfatbeerman was fed misleading or wrong information by the OP ~ a severely edited or misquoted version of the discussions going on in the "other thread".

If you look at the "other thread", you will find comments like : quote "standing on the pegs places your centre of gravity low at peg level [wrong] and will give better stability [right]" unquote. [my brackets]

That's just an example of the mixture of right and wrong stuff going on there.

Plus a lot of : Confusion. Selective & incomplete descriptions. Mis-reading of what was actually written.
Fortunately, such messy thinking is usually rare on the internet !!!

For the record : both in general and in particular, Craneguy's comments are very largely correct.